This is officially an award-winning blog

HNN, Best group blog: "Witty and insightful, the Edge of the American West puts the group in group blog, with frequent contributions from an irreverent band.... Always entertaining, often enlightening, the blog features snazzy visuals—graphs, photos, videos—and zippy writing...."

His was a good enough answer. There was a lot to admire in Robert E. Lee, particularly (as he alluded to, sort of tangentially) Lee’s postwar role, which certainly had a positive effect on the reconciliation process. Stonewall Jackson was a great general less for his tactics than for his mastery of operational maneuver.

Is it my imagination, or would Rodgers have potentially caught some flak if he’d responded “Grant and Sherman” and explained their virtues equally intelligently? It’s much more politically correct to admire Southern generals, I think, though Rodgers was wise to make explicit his overall pro-Union sympathies.

The clip struck me as being open to the interpretation that Rodgers was expressing Southern sympathies, at least on a sentimental level, and hastily protecting himself with the assurance that he was glad the North won. (In this interpretation, pf, that would be the “politically correct” part.) But the evidence is skimpy either way.

I also think that popular history is about 10-20 years behind academic historians in terms of general opinions. Thus, for example, military historians of WWI have a much more positive view of Haig (the British commander) than the popular conception.